116 comments:

And to be honest, some really don't care. I work with some of those who want to be bailed out no matter what the cost. However, to speak in these general terms show, as the professor points out, the contempt and the disconnect of these people for and with the voters.

What about those parts of the bill that authorize snooping into our lives and interference in our medical care to a degree way beyond what the Bush administration was accused of doing by even the nuttiest of people?

As the lawyer in a close corporation set of ownership interests will explain to you: the 51% group usually will rape the 49% group, and low and behold the 51% group isn't interested in hearing about the 49% group's quibbling little squeals. We are now a close corporation voting ourselves the money of the American people. Our only enemy are the Joe the Plumber and Sarah Palin types who don't understand the beauty of Legal Theft. America was a shining city on a hill until we approved of Legal Theft...and while Obamanites cannot tell the difference, the World of private capital can tell and will send the Money where it's safer. Anyone for Swiss Gold Francs?

Recently she was w/ Cavuto on FNC where he was being silly and funny about the removal of the FL water park from the Recovery Plan but his joking threw her off a little because she seemed more interested in her preplanned points rather than adapting. She seems to put some effort into her rants, and she doesn't need Neil screwing it up.

P.S.

Were folks surprised to see Malkin attack Grover? Apparently he's sold out to the Muslims.

I liked that BHO encouraged the guy to take pride in his dedication to his lame job. This was the first point BHO made in his response. The rest of the response was good too; stuff along the lines of how we want our society to recognize and advance (and even support) folks who are honest, dedicated, and hard working--all three characteristics are important, at all levels in our society, IMHO.

Yes, 1jpb, let's adore The Leader (PBUH), let's ignore reality and continue the workship, maybe it will make everything else OK. Let us not care about anything else but the adoration, since we all fit Schumer's comment. Right?

1jpb - Were folks surprised to see Malkin attack Grover? Apparently he's sold out to the Muslims.Grover "Borrowed Saudi, China Money For Tax Cuts For the Rich Solve Everything" Norquist bailed out long, long ago to the International globalists and the Saudi petrodollar.

Buchanan:

As for Europe's threat of a trade war, bring it on!

We would eat their lunch. As analyst Charles McMillion writes, in eight years of Bush, Canada ran up $500 billion in trade surpluses at our expense, Japan ran up $600 billion, the European Union $800 billion.

These three trading partners, often by imposing value-added taxes on U.S. imports, and rebating those taxes on goods sold here, racked up $1.9 trillion in trade surpluses, sucking jobs, factories and technology out of the United States. These trade deficits, and the even larger ones with China, says Paul Volcker, are behind our present crisis.(China accumulated 2 trillion, OPEC 2.2 trillion, even India with a 320 billion and growing surplus with the USA.)

America is bust. It is shameful to have to go to China and Japan to borrow the money to rebuild America. But to go to China and Japan and borrow billions, and not spend the money here, makes zero sense.

We have indulged in free trade for a quarter century. And look where it has gotten us.

Speaking as a NYC resident, I would like to offer my heartfelt apologies to the people of this country that my fellow New Yorkers inflicted this POS putz on them as a senator. Al D'Amato called him a putz the first time he ran and I think Al had him pegged exactly right.

One of the annoying bits of fallout from the 2008 campaign season is that people now think "earmarks" and "pork" are synonyms. So now politicians respond to accusations that a bill contains pork by saying "there are no earmarks".

But an earmark is a directive specifying how money must be allocated. That can be done for non-pork reasons (although in reality it seldom is). Similarly, a bill can contain huge slabs of pork without having any specific directions as to who the money needs to go to. The "stimulus" bill is a good example of this -- hundreds of billions of dollars are being spent exclusively to buy votes for Congressmen.

The rest of the response was good too; stuff along the lines of how we want our society to recognize and advance (and even support) folks who are honest, dedicated, and hard working--all three characteristics are important, at all levels in our society, IMHO.- - - - -

IMHO even more important than telling people to take pride in their lame jobs is telling them to dare to dream, and giving them the liberty to do it.

Senator Schumer may speak for the people who elected him but he does not speak for "the American people." He sure as hell doesn't speak for me. I care a great deal about a so-called "stimulus" bill that laden with pork and every socialist wet dream idea like the mandates on health care.

Revenant said... One of the annoying bits of fallout from the 2008 campaign season is that people now think "earmarks" and "pork" are synonyms. So now politicians respond to accusations that a bill contains pork by saying "there are no earmarks".

Revenant is right. We have to be careful about our terms.

The number and specificity of "earmarks" or "pork" in the bill are separate issues from whether the bill is a boondoggle in terms of the objective of economic stimulus.

From Wikipedia...

The term boondoggle, in the sense of a project that wastes time and money, first appeared during the Great Depression in the 1930s, referring to the millions of jobs given to unemployed men and women to try to get the economy moving again, as part of the New Deal. It came into common usage after a 1935 New York Times headline claimed that over $3 million had been spent teaching the jobless how to make boon doggles.

I heard Bill Burton on TV about a week ago and Obama used the same language - "The American people ... (demand, expect, want, need, etc)." Reminded me of Nixon's old Silent Majority. None of those guys have respect for the American people. They believe they can manipulate us and do whatever they wish.

Among ordinary Japanese, the spending is widely disparaged for having turned the nation into a public-works-based welfare state and making regional economies dependent on Tokyo for jobs. Much of the blame has fallen on the Liberal Democratic Party, which has long used government spending to grease rural vote-buying machines that help keep the party in power.

But US "experts" like Geithner know better supposedly because he spent some time there...

The biggest concern I am having about Obama right now is that he does not want anyone to have a different opinion. “The time for talking is over”? WTF?

This is a guy who has never learned how to argue with an opponent in a reasonable way. He was surprised those republicans didn’t just roll over because he spoke nicely to them. That doesn’t mean that their ideas change, any more than yours would change if I told you this was idiotic with a smile.

And that is why all his talk of "bipartisanship" is nonsense. He has no concept that others have different, valid ideas. Of course, much of the democratic party is right their with him, but still. Grow up.

Joaquin said... Simon - It may survive the Chicago organizer, but will it survive the 49% that 'live' off of the Government?

actually Traditional guy is more correct than Joaquin or Patm, but you all are on the right track. One of those Greeks back in 404BC or so, diagnosed why Democracies ultimately fail. Proven then and later in with the Roman "Bread and Circuses".

It went something like:

Democracies survive until the Majority poor learn they can steal from the rich at the ballot box.

The Obama magic is defining a large enough class of folks who will benefit from giveaways and increased EITC, etc. his campaign line bout "Tax cuts for 95% of working Americans".

The stimulus package is symptomatic of this disease.

Traditionalguy has it right, 51% can loot the Nation if they stick together.

C4 - At least some of what Canada sold to the US was oil - the high prices of oil is not Canada's fault, since Canada is trying to open up new sources and find new reserves, while the USA places its shale and offshore off limits.

Also, the EUniks make some quality products (and they don't try to obey CAFE, they just pay the fines), but have poor consumers. We are now correcting that mismatch with poorer consumers here too.

The biggest concern I am having about Obama right now is that he does not want anyone to have a different opinion. “The time for talking is over”? WTF?

This is surprising to you? Obama has always belonged to the class of politicians who speak of "the need to move beyond partisanship" but really mean "the need to stop talking and just do it my way".

Anyone who talks about setting aside partisan differences is probably a dishonest jackass. We have partisan differences because we have strongly differing opinions about what is best for us and the people and things we care about.

A pretty broad spectrum of market analysts on CNBC are saying in no uncertain terms that the market's drop is due to disappointment with the Geithner plan. For all the hype, his plan really isn't substantial enough to give the market any hope of a turnaround in the credit markets. Details are very fuzzy.

It's pretty well understood that the market does move based not merely on rumors and news but how people feel about those rumors and news. It's an indicator that marries analysis with emotion, with emotion generally taking the lead. And, is this group of analysts is representative, the emotion today is, "Oh fuck, he's got nothin'!"

A pretty broad spectrum of market analysts on CNBC are saying in no uncertain terms that the market's drop is due to disappointment with the Geithner plan.

With the numbers being tossed around this may well be one of those days where a few news events really do make a difference in the markets.

But the fact remains that these analysts are applying cause to an effect that already happened. This is what analysts always do. I really don't think many were surprised by Geithner's plan. But it's a bear market and prevailing attitudes are easily amplified.

Well, not surprising exactly…more disappointing. I didn’t vote for him, but I hoped he would maybe grow in office or something. I realize it’s only been a few weeks, but he already preempted Chuck for his whining last night so I’m no longer disposed to be generous.

I've long considered Schumer simply Barney Frank without the excess saliva. Though, for the record, Barbara Boxer and Dick Durbin make Schumer look like Henry Clay

Ha, ha.

The biggest concern I am having about Obama right now is that he does not want anyone to have a different opinion.

GB Shaw - Man and Superman

We must either breed political capacity or be ruined by Democracy, which was forced on us by the failure of the older alternatives. Yet if Despotism failed only for want of a capable benevolent despot, what chance has Democracy, which requires a whole population of capable voters.--Epistle Dedicatory

Holdfast - I accept most of the deficit with Canada as far, far better than depending on oil from Russia or KSA. Buchanan adds Canada to point out that even our once #1 Trading partner that we maintained a rough trade balance has pulled away from us. And that the NAFTA agreement that preceeded losing so much of our economy to China, and was supposed to create jobs and give us surpluses with both Canada and Mexico - or "more exciting, better-paying high tech jobs" was also a pack of Corporatist-Globalist lies.

Market drop due to Treasury guy? Then explain why it jumped up when unemploytment losses came out (same day). Schumer may have spoken like a fool but all the nonsense here by clever folks does not change the fact that the GOP got us into a mess and a lousy war based on a lie and now clever remarks about the Dems? Were you posting snippy comments when the GOP had control of House, Senate and White House? Don't expect miracles, total porklessness out of DC; but you have a job, a home...many Americans no longer do.

What have you done to help the homeless, the hungry? the needs of the nation? made clever comments on your keyboard, that's what.

all the nonsense here by clever folks does not change the fact that the GOP got us into a mess and a lousy war based on a lie and now clever remarks about the Dems?- - - - -

yeah, and all the clever folks who think this complex issue can be put into context by puking up "Bush lied us into war." Oh my God. You didn't really just say that did you? You are not still having trouble between a lie, which is the deliberate telling of an untruth, and a man telling you the same thing his predecessor told you, the predecessors cabinet, wife, buddies, international friends, intelligence and the whole Democrat Senate had been telling you since 1998?

I hope that's not true, Eric. I'm fearful that it is, but I'm still hoping that a majority of American voters will reject that. That they didn't think it through in November because the Republicans failed to be the conservative choice, but that the voters themselves will still get it.

Darcy, I used to hope as well. Pournelle says despair is a sin, but I'm not religious. I wish I had a nickel for every time I heard someone say "the government should pay for that", like "the government" was a really rich relative.

Then explain why it jumped up when unemploytment losses came out (same day).

Because when businesses are laying off people in order to cut expenses (reduce overhead, cut benefit costs and retirement costs that contribute nothing to the production of the product) it generally means that the company will be making a more profit down the road or lose less down the road. Assuming the earnings rise, the price of the stock will usually rise.

Quote: "PE is a much better comparison of the value of a stock than the price. A $10 stock with a PE of 40 is much more "expensive" than a $100 stock with a PE of 6. You are paying more for the $10 stock's future earnings stream. The $10 stock is probably a small company with an exciting product with few competitors. The $100 stock is probably pretty staid - maybe a buggy whip manufacturer"

Buying those stocks now while the P/E ratio is low is a good business move assuming that the market will continue to work in its own semi-orderly way. When the Government just took control of the economy, our health insurance and everything else, the market realized that all normal bets were off and it was time to cut the losses NOW.

Then explain why it jumped up when unemploytment losses came out (same day).

Depending on the company of course and looking at it from the investor/shareholder's point of view or from the financial analyist, some unemployment is not always bad news.

In fact it can often be good news. If GM could lay off most of its Unionized workers and at a later date hire new people at more reasonable rates and without the exorbitant benefit packages, that stock would rise. If GM just announced the lay off of the Unions who have a stranglehold on their company, their stock would rise.

The government is like a big dumb oaf bumbling around in the capital markets. And as DBQ has said, as long as the government is stumbling around in the economy, all the free capital will stay on the sidelines and wait.

Nobody can figure the risk return curve.

Nobody can predict when the giant will bump some part of the economy and completely crush it.

Nobody can predict whether they’re position will get crushed down or drowned by some “tiny, little pork” that sloshes out of the oaf’s pocket.

We’re in uncharted territory here, and those that say they know we need to do this or that is a liar or a con.

Yep. Had you listened to Schumer's entire speech, you would have contempt for the Senate Republicans, too.

I'd like to hear an expanded version, however, that includes a minute before and a minute after.

Schumer was reading the riot act to (all but the courageous three) Republicans -- who asked for and got $100 billion additional tax cuts in an $800 billion stimulus package -- but who then cynically voted against the bill. The Republican's excusing their treachery -- by seizing on some trivial amount of alleged pork -- was particularly deserving of contempt.

If GM could lay off most of its Unionized workers and at a later date hire new people at more reasonable rates and without the exorbitant benefit packages

The exorbitant benefit packages belong mostly to the retirees. If GM could shed its labor contracts, or if they went bankrupt, we then would fund the retirees' packages through PBGT. Considering some Big Three employees could retire as young as 48 (30 and out), that's a lot of retirement for the rest of us to finance.

as long as the government is stumbling around in the economy, all the free capital will stay on the sidelines and wait.

Nobody can figure the risk return curve.

Nobody can predict when the giant will bump some part of the economy and completely crush it.

Exactamundo

Smart investors and money managers are pulling out of the market to take a wait and see look. Even the Bond markets are trembling right now, because the bond buyers are drying up because there is no certainty that even a US Treasury Bond or Bill will be able to pay its obligations.

Anyone feel real comfortable buying several billion dollars of California General Obligation bonds right now, when the State can't pay its own employees? Think China is going to want to buy a lot of US debt unless the rate to compensate for the risk is really really high? I think not. What do you think that having a spike in Treasury rates is going to do to lending?

Bumbling around indeed. Obama and the rest of his thugs haven't got one clue about the economy. Furthermore, they don't care. As long as they can hand out the candy, cigarettes and free beer to buy votes to create a permanent power base, its good enough for them.

That man is NOTHING but talk. He has showed up at several college graduations in my family and blabbed his way through speeches that were, in every case, all about him. At my daughter's graduation, he was not even on the program. We were almost through with the already-lengthy speeches when a small plane buzzed overhead and the next thing we knew, there he was on the platform, having literally flown in, and forced us to sit through half an hour of blab about just how great Chuck Schumer is before we FINALLY got to see our kids graduate.

The exorbitant benefit packages belong mostly to the retirees. If GM could shed its labor contracts, or if they went bankrupt, we then would fund the retirees' packages through PBGT

Yes and no. The current employees are costing an arm and a leg because it is a DBP and has to be actuarially funded for future expectations. When the markets go down and the return on the portfolio doesn't meet current acturarial estimates (i.e instead of 7% return we have a -35%) the company has to put in more money......A LOT more money.

If GM were to go Chap 11 restructuring and peel of the health and pension plan for retirees, the PBGC would settle for less than the full benefits that GM has to pay now.

The taxpayers are not on the hook for PBGC." PBGC receives no funds from general tax revenues. Operations are financed by insurance premiums set by Congress and paid by sponsors of defined benefit plans, investment income, assets from pension plans trusteed by PBGC, and recoveries from the companies formerly responsible for the plans."

GM can't afford to hire new employees because it would just make their unfunded pension liablity even worse. In the future, without a DBP and Cadillac health plan, GM would be able to hire new employees and the cost of cars could come down.

Schumer was reading the riot act to (all but the courageous three) Republicans -- who asked for and got $100 billion additional tax cuts in an $800 billion stimulus package -- but who then cynically voted against the bill.

I'm curious. Why are you bothering to peddle that line of bullshit here?

It isn't like we haven't all been following the news for the last weeks. We're all well aware that the Republicans never said, hinted, implied, or even idly speculated that they MIGHT vote for the bill if Obama threw in $100 billion in tax cuts.

The notion that the Republicans reneged on a deal is a pathetic lie. You know it, I know it -- everybody knows it. The Republican Congressional delegation has thought this bill was a big steaming turd from day one. The only people who said they'd be bought off with $100 billion in tax cuts were the so-called "courageous three".

There's nothing cynical about voting against the bill. The Democrats are borrowing the better part of a trillion dollars and giving it to people who vote for Democrats. The word that best describes a Republican opponent of this bill is "sane".

Now, if there was any rational reason to think the bill would actually ward off recession -- or get us out of it sooner -- then Republicans might be well advised to sign on just so they can claim joint credit. But there's no reason to expect that. There is no economic theory under which this bill is an intelligent use of money.

The funny thing about Schumer is that he is not very good at bringing pork back to NY. In fact, Al D'Amato by himself and with a Dem Congress and Dem Pres was able to bring more real dollars to NY than the combination of Hillary and Schumer together. Apparently he is not interested in representing his constituents at all; he is all about representing and aggrandizing Chuckie Schumer at the expense of whoever gets between him and a mic.

Uh, Revenant? Don't you realize that a stimulus bill and a spending bill are the same thing?

"It is only government that can break the vicious cycle where lost jobs lead to people spending less money which leads to even more layoffs."

Who said that? Oh yeah -- that guy with the degree from Harvard, who's so much smarter than you or me. So much for your capitalism. You're done. Game over, doooood.

How could it be any simpler? The government will create demand for products, by purchasing them. The government will determine what a fair wage is, and how many hours we'll have to work to earn it. Eventually we'll just have the government order factories to produce this many of that widget and that many of the other widget; and the government will tell us how many of each widget we can have.

No more dictatorship by the rich white industrialist -- you'll do what you're ordered, and produce your widgets, and be happy with what we in the government give you in return.

In the Big Rock Candy Mountains there's a land that's fair and bright,Where the handouts grow on bushes and you sleep out every night,Where the boxcars are all empty and the sun shines every day on the birds and the bees and the cigarette trees...link

Socialism is awesome. Think of Denmark, where everyone pays more than half their earnings in income taxes. They live happy, drunken lives, want for nothing, and all is swell. We just need to lie back and take it.

Sure. But you see how a person could get pissed off if he made concessions to accommodate a person who was never going to support him in the first place, no matter what he did.

What you mean is "you can see a person might get pissed off at people who didn't agree to do things his way". Sure. Four year olds act like that all the time.

Obviously Republicans aren't going to agree to borrow $800 billion and spend it on buying votes for Democratic Congressmen. If Schumer actually for one instant thought that $100 billion in tax cuts -- most of which will ALSO go to lower-income Democratic voters -- was a sufficient "concession" to attract Republican Party support then I can only wonder how he ties his shoes in the morning. Maybe he uses those Velcro straps instead.

Then explain why it jumped up when unemploytment losses came out (same day).

Because when businesses are laying off people in order to cut expenses (reduce overhead, cut benefit costs and retirement costs that contribute nothing to the production of the product) it generally means that the company will be making a more profit down the road or lose less down the road.

Indeed. Chainsaw Al and all those layoffs resulted in increased stock prices, right?

I am sure that most Americans won't care about porky amendments. The American has already shown that. For example look at the price of fuel. At $4 per gallon, people reduced their driving. At $2 they haven't restarted. Given a bad economy they stopped spending. If the porky ammendments go through, they won't start spending. Oh I am sure they care about wasting money on mouse preserves, frisbee parks and the like, but there personal spending will not increase as a result.